I have never been out of the U.S. coastal waters on a boat yet. Several
of my friends and I are planning an extensive world cruise in two
years. All of us have had extensive training in the use of firearms of
all types and we all enjoy shooting sports as a hobby. We all like
trapshooting so we will have at least 6 shotguns plus a few thousand
rounds. Add in personal weapons and there will be an extensive arsenal
on board. I know some countries absolutely prohibit personal firearms
so we will have to take precautions in certain waters. Mexico is one of
the most prohibitive I understand. Since we don't want to have an
international incident what procedures are best in a situation like
this? I have suggested we build a couple of watertight capsules for the
weapons and ammunition. With GPS and the appropriate eqipment we could
drop them overboard when entering restricted areas and then retrieve
them later. Are there any better but legal options that could be
followed?
TIA,
Dennis

On 23 Jun 2005 08:20:51 -0700, "twoguns"
wrote:
Since we don't want to have an
international incident what procedures are best in a situation like
this?

To obey the laws regarding firearms in the waters of the countries in
which you sail.


I have suggested we build a couple of watertight capsules for the
weapons and ammunition. With GPS and the appropriate eqipment we could
drop them overboard when entering restricted areas and then retrieve
them later.

How this is different from a drug smuggler off-loading bales of drugs
into the sea for "later retrieval" is beyond me. Your hobbies of
sailing and shooting may be incompatible in certain parts of the
world. You'll have to ask country by country. Most places require you
surrender all firearms and all ammo upon first contacting the
authorities/practique/zarpe/what have you. Other places require the
firearms to be locked the entire time aboard. Americans, in
particular, some of whom don't "get it" on how most of the world views
guns on boats, can and will have their vessels seized for violations
of these sort of laws in many places.

Are there any better but legal options that could be
followed?

Almost anything is better than your idea, which may seem clever to
you, but is the equivalent of filling a tank on board with undeclared
rum, or bringing drugs into a country.

Speaking of which, you must carry a "drugs manifest" in many
countries. Some over-the-counter drugs in North America are illegal to
possess without a prescription in some countries, and others are
illegal to possess in the kind of quantities a long-term cruiser might
have on board.

Like bringing foreign fruit in some places, or rabbits to Australia or
uncertified pets to New Zealand, many officials will confiscate or
destroy such items on the spot with no debate.

It's no different from the U.S. banning Canadian beef on suspicion of
BSE, or jailing people with legal medical marijuana outside of their
home jurisdiction. Your country reserves the right to seize my vessel
if Cuban rum is found aboard (perfectly legal to me) or if it is even
suspected I will be travelling to Cuba, without touching a U.S. port.

This is similar.

R.

On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 15:07:18 -0400, rhys wrote:



Almost anything is better than your idea, which may seem clever to
you, but is the equivalent of filling a tank on board with undeclared
rum, or bringing drugs into a country.


I agree entirely. From those cruising yachts we have met, it seems
that mainly American yachts feel that carrying guns is necessary. It
should be borne in mind that:

1 Those who are going to attack you are probably more likely to shoot
than you are and probably value life (others) less. We have an
American couple as friends who we have cruised with for a while. He is
a retired IBMer who has never really used a gun. He has an old shotgun
on board that he has so much trouble with every time he enters or
leaves a country - an extra thing to do when you leave. I simply
cannot imagine him pulling the trigger quickly enough to kill someone.
He has different moral values than those that may attack him.

2. Opponents of carrying guns such as Peter Tangveld (lots of cruising
experience) say that if you don't have a weapon you are more likely to
survive - obviously there are exceptions. Tangveld believes that his
wife would not have been shot dead if she had not pointed her rifle.
Their attackers did not harm he or his child but merely took what they
wanted. Peter Blake would not have been shot in the Amazon if he had
not emerged with a firearm. The others with him were not shot.

We personally have met with cruisers who have been attacked by
"pirates" in the Gulf of Yemen; all the boarders wanted was their gear
and money.

3. Legally, guns of any type have to be declared and surrendered to
customs officials or the police on entry in all countries we have
visited so far. There are serious penalties for not doing so. An
Australian customs officer told us that they expect that most US
yachts carry weapons and sometimes search the vessel if none are
declared and the person "seems to be the type who would carry a gun".
An Australian millionare was recently gaoled in Indonesia for not
declaring his weapons. Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore have the
death penalty for having unlicenced firearms (in their countries) and
do hang people for this offence.

4. If you declare your weaponry and surrender it to officials upon
entry to a country then you won't have it when you probably need it
most - few attacks on yachts occur at sea. Most happen whilst at
anchor.

It should be borne in mind that a yacht may be boarded by those with
malice aforethought anywhere. It does not have to be Indonesia or
Brazil. There have been several incidents whilst anchored in the Bay
of Naples and even to a yacht anchored off the city of Messina in
Italy that come to mind. These are acts of piracy too, or are pirates
members of that class only if they wear an eye patch, have a peg leg
and have a parrot on their shoulder?

We have another American friend who sails with his family between
Malaysia and the Phillippines. He has a wooden "replica" of an M-16
that he waves about if suspicious characters come to close. Most
attackers do not want to get hurt either. He dopesn't have to
surrender this to the authorities.

with all of this I admit that I have a 12 gauge flare pistol with
standard flares. It is purely a weapon of final self defence and is
mounted below in its cannister where I can grab it is someone boards
while we are sleeping.

What really worries us and others we have talked to is those who do
carry weaponry. Some Americans are adherents of the gun culture who
seem to think that it is ok to shoot someone even if your property is
being threatened. What if I rowed up to their boat at night for any
reason - might I get shot by a gung-ho John Wayne type?

Peter.
N.Z. yacht Herodotus

"Peter Hendra" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 15:07:18 -0400, rhys wrote:



Almost anything is better than your idea, which may seem clever to
you, but is the equivalent of filling a tank on board with undeclared
rum, or bringing drugs into a country.


I agree entirely. From those cruising yachts we have met, it seems
that mainly American yachts feel that carrying guns is necessary. It
should be borne in mind that:

1 Those who are going to attack you are probably more likely to shoot
than you are and probably value life (others) less. We have an
American couple as friends who we have cruised with for a while. He is
a retired IBMer who has never really used a gun. He has an old shotgun
on board that he has so much trouble with every time he enters or
leaves a country - an extra thing to do when you leave. I simply
cannot imagine him pulling the trigger quickly enough to kill someone.
He has different moral values than those that may attack him.

2. Opponents of carrying guns such as Peter Tangveld (lots of cruising
experience) say that if you don't have a weapon you are more likely to
survive - obviously there are exceptions. Tangveld believes that his
wife would not have been shot dead if she had not pointed her rifle.
Their attackers did not harm he or his child but merely took what they
wanted. Peter Blake would not have been shot in the Amazon if he had
not emerged with a firearm. The others with him were not shot.

We personally have met with cruisers who have been attacked by
"pirates" in the Gulf of Yemen; all the boarders wanted was their gear
and money.

3. Legally, guns of any type have to be declared and surrendered to
customs officials or the police on entry in all countries we have
visited so far. There are serious penalties for not doing so. An
Australian customs officer told us that they expect that most US
yachts carry weapons and sometimes search the vessel if none are
declared and the person "seems to be the type who would carry a gun".
An Australian millionare was recently gaoled in Indonesia for not
declaring his weapons. Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore have the
death penalty for having unlicenced firearms (in their countries) and
do hang people for this offence.

4. If you declare your weaponry and surrender it to officials upon
entry to a country then you won't have it when you probably need it
most - few attacks on yachts occur at sea. Most happen whilst at
anchor.

It should be borne in mind that a yacht may be boarded by those with
malice aforethought anywhere. It does not have to be Indonesia or
Brazil. There have been several incidents whilst anchored in the Bay
of Naples and even to a yacht anchored off the city of Messina in
Italy that come to mind. These are acts of piracy too, or are pirates
members of that class only if they wear an eye patch, have a peg leg
and have a parrot on their shoulder?

We have another American friend who sails with his family between
Malaysia and the Phillippines. He has a wooden "replica" of an M-16
that he waves about if suspicious characters come to close. Most
attackers do not want to get hurt either. He dopesn't have to
surrender this to the authorities.

with all of this I admit that I have a 12 gauge flare pistol with
standard flares. It is purely a weapon of final self defence and is
mounted below in its cannister where I can grab it is someone boards
while we are sleeping.

What really worries us and others we have talked to is those who do
carry weaponry. Some Americans are adherents of the gun culture who
seem to think that it is ok to shoot someone even if your property is
being threatened. What if I rowed up to their boat at night for any
reason - might I get shot by a gung-ho John Wayne type?

Peter.
N.Z. yacht Herodotus

Well, duhhh... just kidding. I guess you never heard about the guy who shot
some kid on Halloween. He warned him off, then shot him. Unfortunately, the
kid didn't speak English.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

If you are right Rhys I guess we will just have to take the slingshots
and bows & arrows and leave the firearms at home. It is not a matter of
feeling a need for protection it is a matter of pure fun. We all enjoy
target shooting in one form or another. As far as know we won't be
entering any pirate infested waters.
Dennis

On 23 Jun 2005 16:02:50 -0700, "twoguns"
wrote:

If you are right Rhys I guess we will just have to take the slingshots
and bows & arrows and leave the firearms at home. It is not a matter of
feeling a need for protection it is a matter of pure fun. We all enjoy
target shooting in one form or another. As far as know we won't be
entering any pirate infested waters.
Dennis

I come from a family with both military firearms instructors and
tactical squad police officers in it. I am neither squeamish nor
afraid of guns: they are tools with a limited set of applications. I
wouldn't take a running circular saw on a crowded bus, and I wouldn't
take a rifle on a boat: the complications outweight the benefits and
the "fun" in my estimation.

Strangely enough, though, the "slingshots and bows and arrows" are not
a bad idea, as they are quite legal in almost every country. Several
pioneering cruisers used slingshots to send film canisters and small
pieces of mail onto passing ships, and a bow and arrow could be used
for fishing in some situations or for sending a messenger line to
another boat over some distance.

For self-defense, I like the 12-gauge flare gun, or maybe a crossbow.
Realistically, though, if five guys with AK-47s board you, you would
be rash to have a go at them with guns. Maybe a small missile to blast
their boat before it got within machine gun range?

R.

Or as eight or ten somali's armed with AK-47s recently found out:
It is also rash to attempt to board a yacht piloted by a scared yachtie
armed with a 12 guage loaded with 00 buck. Of course, it helps if you
have a steel yacht so that their bullets are'nt just whizzing through the
FRP.

Don W.

rhys wrote:


For self-defense, I like the 12-gauge flare gun, or maybe a crossbow.
Realistically, though, if five guys with AK-47s board you, you would
be rash to have a go at them with guns. Maybe a small missile to blast
their boat before it got within machine gun range?

R.

twoguns wrote:
I have never been out of the U.S. coastal waters on a boat yet. Several
of my friends and I are planning an extensive world cruise in two
years. All of us have had extensive training in the use of firearms of
all types and we all enjoy shooting sports as a hobby.blah snipped

It seems this perennial post never gets the herbicide it needs. Maybe
it began in the matchlock era - even before RBC. :-)

I'm a lifelong shootist & have a CCW in several states. I've taken a
stainless Python aboard out around my local harbor just for plinking &
to reprove how near-impossible it is to hit anything from aboard a
sailboat with a handgun unless its flat-assed calm & you are tire up to
something somewhat substantial. I'm also a former commercial Cheng,
former int'l fleet mgr, and a chicken sailor who is more preoccupied
than many with the notion of staying alive and safe, but never effette
or wimpy about it as is recreationally fashionable.

It's totally useless, pointless and poor judgement to carry a firearm
on any recreational vessel sailing anywhere beyond home port. It only
demonstrates that the Owner has no clue concerning what true safety,
prudence, and mortal self-longevity, or even human relations
discernment may be, let alone how to implement any of them.

A commerical vessel's Master often has a handgun. It is kept in the
ship's safe (which is often located in part of his quarters) and in
port the safe is sealed by Customs. The sole purpose of the weapon is
as possible defense against mutiny or for dispatching someone already
permitted or employed onboard who has become an imminent threat to the
safety and seaworthiness of the vessel, crew and cargo. As the old
expression goes: "MBK" - the Captain may marry, bury or kill - the
latter if and when in his sole judgement it is necessary. THIS IS NOT
YOU, and if you think you vaguely resemble in role and authority the
Master of an internationally trading vessel aboard your toy dreamship
and floating love palace you should have yourself voluntarily committed
to a mental institution before someone else does it for you, because
you are a grave danger to yourself and others. And of course, most
Masters have either almost forgotten the gun is in the safe, of have no
interest in it, or have never fired any handgun in their lives, or it
is a dumbass .22 derringer because the Owners are cheapskates.

This issue has nothing whatsoever to do with "Americans", "gun
"rights", "defense", or other horse hockey thrown port/starboard from
either point of view in NG's until it dribbles off the deck & out the
freeing ports like puke. At least puke is beneficially nutritional to
some forms of marine life. This isn't.

The true issue surrounds what is diplomacy, common sense, tactical
truth, and the vagarities of real life.

Any enemy boarding your noncombatant vessel has every tactical
advantage, as the two thread tales of I-got-my-ass-shot-dead armed
"defenders" (NOT) hint at. It would waste four long paragraphs to
enumerate them. Anyone who cannot enumerate them for themselves has
either been splicing the mainbrace for too many years, or has some
fundamental problem with their upbringing.

You are supposed to AVOID all potential or reasonably forseeable
circumstances of navigation or conduct which place you or your crew or
vessel as risk. This is NOT the same thing as "avoiding dangerous
ports"! The WHOLE PLANET is "dangerous" and unpredictable, as are its
inhabitants. Ergo, if you choose to believe that a yacht is a small
portable floating motel where you may go to sleep all night without a
standing watch on deck, the cruel truth is that you deserve whatever
consequences may ensue and that ALL of them are YOUR fault. The mere
fact that thousands, if not millions, of boaters do this, is moot in
any absolute terms.

In landlubber concealed carry, you would not go into any locale,
neighborhood nor even risk any kind of situation which could lead to a
conflict, unless you were an idiot or an outlaw. You would
automatically know that being armed in such a siutation exposes you to
more danger, not any less, and you would behave with great diplomacy,
ignore many affronts and cheerfully lose many arguements, and even
endure minor attacks or a punch in the nose, because you would know the
alternative is a gunfight where no one comes in second. You would know
that if you used your weapon you would still be exceedingly fortunate
to survive the outcome. If you survived, you would expect to be booked
and jailed for murder, and would fully expect to fight an uphill
$200,000 legal case, perhaps losing your house and car for the
continued priviledge of drawing breath in this vale of tears. And you
would fully expect the DA to ask you when on the stand: "Sir, please
tell this Court WHY you were out at 3:30AM in a neighborhood with four
open bars with a loaded gun - weren't you just LOOKING for a
gunfight??" And he would have one helluva point for you to overcome
with the jury. God help you if it was stoked with Glasers or other
effective anti-personnel flesh-destroying fodder.

And all of this, and much more, goes along with being a LAW ABIDING
CITIZEN in the UNITED ****ING STATES and with A LICENSE TO CARRY A
DEADLY WEAPON and ASHORE.

Yet somehow, when a tyro steps aboard his yatch, he or she immediately
thinks the world and its ways have been suspended in his or her
particular case - or even that they SHOULD be (NOT). They can consider
committing the exact same thing at an anchorage or dock IN A FOREIGN
PORT no less, but it is "different" because the hoods, scumbags, and
even the poor and hungry who are jealous of your wealth (and insulted
by your arrogance and superior attitude too) are now called "pirates."

Professional seagoing people learn by discipline and necessity to not
draw attention to themselves, not to tempt nor annoy the locals by
their appearance, demeanor or actions (and you may be a very offensive
SOB or bitch when you THINK you are being a great guy), to keep the
details of their vessel or her berth or anchorage private, to be
winsome and friendly, to be humble, even generous within prudent
limits, to be kind to the poor, to quietly promote goodwill, to avoid
every kind of trouble or remote smell of it, to make valuable allies
with key (or maybe even seamy) people on the waterfront, and to be EVER
WATCHFUL DAY AND NIGHT. Without these things, robbers and other manner
of evildoers board huge vessels more challenging than yours and cause
much bigger problems than your little $20,000 or so robbery and some
bruises.

Obviously and knowing nothing of these essential SAFETY things, you and
others seek to substitute them all with a firearm - "firearm insurance"
in your vain imagination of how waterfronts, ports and indeed the whole
rest of life, works.

OR, you are on the "other side of the arguement" and you commit all of
the same errors, vanities and inadequacies while characterizing the
other camp as savage American gunslingers, which makes you no safer and
only 2% less ignorant, but possibly 4x the twit.

Do not be surprised if we eventually see real and strict education,
training and internationally regulated licensing requirements for
navigating little recreational vessels comparable to what the real ones
require. It will be this kind of stupid **** that precipitates it, and
if you keep it up, I hope it costs you two hundred thousand dollars, 4
years of formal fulltime training in an ugly uniform, and another 5 or
6 years of supervised blue water seatime to obtain one. By then,
you'll have forgotten where you gun is.

On 24 Jun 2005 01:52:12 -0700, wrote:

Professional seagoing people learn by discipline and necessity to not
draw attention to themselves, not to tempt nor annoy the locals by
their appearance, demeanor or actions (and you may be a very offensive
SOB or bitch when you THINK you are being a great guy), to keep the
details of their vessel or her berth or anchorage private, to be
winsome and friendly, to be humble, even generous within prudent
limits, to be kind to the poor, to quietly promote goodwill, to avoid
every kind of trouble or remote smell of it, to make valuable allies
with key (or maybe even seamy) people on the waterfront, and to be EVER
WATCHFUL DAY AND NIGHT. Without these things, robbers and other manner
of evildoers board huge vessels more challenging than yours and cause
much bigger problems than your little $20,000 or so robbery and some
bruises.

Couldn't agree more. It is so easy to get alongside the locals without
being patronising. It is better insurance than any weapon.

Do not be surprised if we eventually see real and strict education,
training and internationally regulated licensing requirements for
navigating little recreational vessels comparable to what the real ones
require. It will be this kind of stupid **** that precipitates it, and
if you keep it up, I hope it costs you two hundred thousand dollars, 4
years of formal fulltime training in an ugly uniform, and another 5 or
6 years of supervised blue water seatime to obtain one. By then,
you'll have forgotten where you gun is.

Cruising by small vessel is already getting more and more difficult
and regulated - most regulations being set in place are because of
someone's stupidity or misfortune. I once had a hard time being given
port clearance to leave Turkey as I did,t have any certificate of
competency to show the harbourmaster's assistant - my passport and log
showing where I had sailed from were of no avail. Many ports and
marinas in Europe require both a certificate of competency as well as
third party insurance - what next.

Peter Hendra wrote:

Cruising by small vessel is already getting more and more difficult
and regulated - most regulations being set in place are because of
someone's stupidity or misfortune. I once had a hard time being given
port clearance to leave Turkey as I did,t have any certificate of
competency to show the harbourmaster's assistant - my passport and log
showing where I had sailed from were of no avail. Many ports and
marinas in Europe require both a certificate of competency as well as
third party insurance - what next.

I can see that. You wouldn't believe the number of adventurers/wackos
who want to leave this area to paddle/row/sail the smallest vessels
across the Atlantic. Our coast guard usually has to go and rescue them
before they get out of our jurisdiction.